DIsh DirecTV Merger

[muwarrior69]

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_25424764/dish-directv-shares-rise-reported-merger-talk

Chicos, any chance of that happening?

[ChicosBailBonds]

It was fun watching the stock yesterday.  For the record, I own both stocks.

I have no idea if it will happen.  The CEO of DTV has stated that regulatory hurdles would be difficult it would seem, but who knows.

[4everwarriors]

Rumored sale of DTV to ATT. Is this a good or bad thing for our brother, Chicos?

[keefe]

It was fun watching the stock yesterday.  For the record, I own both stocks.

I have no idea if it will happen.  The CEO of DTV has stated that regulatory hurdles would be difficult it would seem, but who knows.

I was on TMO's Corporate Strategy team during the proposed merger with ATT. I interfaced a lot with DoJ lawyers and their dislike for the deal was palpable. When the guy at 1600 Penn doesn't like something things tend not to happen. I am guessing that same guy doesn't think much of this deal either.

[jesmu84]

Rumored sale of DTV to ATT. Is this a good or bad thing for our brother, Chicos?

It's always good to decrease competition in this area. Once the Comcast/TW merger goes through, we should merge ATT/DTV with them and then with NBC Universal. Why stop there though? Throw in Dish as well. Monopoly? What's that? Net neutrality? No way.

[ChicosBailBonds]

It's always good to decrease competition in this area. Once the Comcast/TW merger goes through, we should merge ATT/DTV with them and then with NBC Universal. Why stop there though? Throw in Dish as well. Monopoly? What's that? Net neutrality? No way.

Comes down to what competition is really being removed or decreased?  In the Comcast TW merger, those two systems do not overlap anywhere, so the competitive choices remain.  In the case of AT&T and DTV, it impacts about 5 million customers.

The flipside of the question is why is consolidation happening?  Because costs of programming content are very high and the only way to fight back against a Disney, Viacom, CBS, NewsCorp, etc is with scale.

I get the fears, I also get customers screaming about prices.  It goes both ways.  We'll see what happens, but as I said here 5 months ago, this industry is ripe for consolidation IMO so the events do not surprise me.

[jesmu84]

Comes down to what competition is really being removed or decreased?  In the Comcast TW merger, those two systems do not overlap anywhere, so the competitive choices remain.  In the case of AT&T and DTV, it impacts about 5 million customers.

The flipside of the question is why is consolidation happening?  Because costs of programming content are very high and the only way to fight back against a Disney, Viacom, CBS, NewsCorp, etc is with scale.

I get the fears, I also get customers screaming about prices.  It goes both ways.  We'll see what happens, but as I said here 5 months ago, this industry is ripe for consolidation IMO so the events do not surprise me.

Agree with you and understand. Those programming costs need to come down and there needs to be more competition at that level as well. NBC/Universal was TERRIBLE for being permitted.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Agree with you and understand. Those programming costs need to come down and there needs to be more competition at that level as well. NBC/Universal was TERRIBLE for being permitted.

I wish there was an answer to that one, but as long as players want more money, actors more money, unions doing production work, writers, directors, etc....I don't see those costs going down.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Interesting take...video...on this today


http://www.bloomberg.com/video/is-directv-worth-50-billion-FgM89yfxQdO4Kd5lM5qQzA.html

[brandx]

Comes down to what competition is really being removed or decreased?  In the Comcast TW merger, those two systems do not overlap anywhere, so the competitive choices remain.  In the case of AT&T and DTV, it impacts about 5 million customers.

While you certainly are more informed than I about these things, I will have to disagree with you here.

You talk about how the two systems don't overlap so competition is not affected. That is NOT what the merger is about. It is all about controlling access to the Internet, period.

The merger would leave Comcast in a great position to wage war on  annoying Internet firms like Netflix, YouTube, or Amazon TV, all of whom, by cable standards, deliver way too much stuff for way too little money. (Netflix's $7.95 a month is what Comcast charges you just to lease a modem.) Comcast will use their increased power to demand special fees (a net-neutrality violation?), or to make deals with Hollywood that will starve its rivals of good or recent content.

[ChicosBailBonds]

While you certainly are more informed than I about these things, I will have to disagree with you here.

You talk about how the two systems don't overlap so competition is not affected. That is NOT what the merger is about. It is all about controlling access to the Internet, period.

The merger would leave Comcast in a great position to wage war on  annoying Internet firms like Netflix, YouTube, or Amazon TV, all of whom, by cable standards, deliver way too much stuff for way too little money. (Netflix's $7.95 a month is what Comcast charges you just to lease a modem.) Comcast will use their increased power to demand special fees (a net-neutrality violation?), or to make deals with Hollywood that will starve its rivals of good or recent content.

Well, when you say period, that's all this is about, you are incorrect.  That is part of it, but it is not all of it.  Keep in mind there are other ways to get the internet, that competition exists today and by removing one you still are not taking away a consumer's choice because those territories for cable (tv or internet) are drawn without overlap (in 99% of the country).

The whole thing with "waging war" against those firms, that's going to happen regardless and already has started.  They are using their pipes to drive their business.  Same argument the gov't makes for roads, rail, etc.  I wouldn't call it waging war, I would call it paying a toll.  If Netflix is driving 40% of traffic on my network and that hurts the quality for all my other customers, why aren't they paying a higher rate for that access?   

Or as a friend of mine at one of the pipe owners told me.  If they could kick that traffic to the curb, the overall experience for everyone would improve exponentially....how many people who don't give a rip about Netflix or those bandwidth hogs would be happier customers knowing their own bandwidth improved as a result?  Only so much capacity on those lines, so pay to play is going to exist.  There's a reason why Shasta cola is at the bottom of the shelf and Pepsi and Coke are eye level.  It's buying access.

[brandx]

Well, when you say period, that's all this is about, you are incorrect.  That is part of it, but it is not all of it.

I should have said it by far the biggest reason. Nothing is a close second.

[DegenerateDish]

For the record, I am not merging with DirecTv.

[brandx]

For the record, I am not merging with DirecTv.

I was just gettin' ready to order MUDirectTV

[ChicosBailBonds]

For the record, I am not merging with DirecTv.

I'm picking Verizon or Sprint for you.... Just a hunch.